4 ms·
Most of these things (if not all) can be done in Firefox. I'd assume the point of this is to show off the cool things you can do with "HTML5"-- and making it w
by gkoberger 16y ago
Most of these things (if not all) can be done in Firefox. I'd assume the point of this is to show off the cool things you can do with "HTML5"-- and making it work in just one browser seems to go against the goal.
- tmgrhm 16y agobox-shadow is CSS3, not HTML. HTML is markup for text, CSS is formatting that text. It's not about making it only work in one browser — it's that currently these effects collectively (as Arnorhs points out, this isn't just box-shadow) are only rendered properly by that one browser (actually it's the rendering engine which is most important here — WebKit — which means I can view them fine in Safari 5.1).
- defroost 16y agoI not sure why the developer labels it "Chrome only". I use Webkit Nightly (Safari) as my main browser, and it's slightly annoying when developers don't seem to realize that Safari and Chrome are both Webkit browsers and as such their support of the CSS3 spec is exactly the same.
- cubicle67 16y agoThe difference is the version of webkit included in the browser. I'm also running nightly Webkit, and all the examples work fine, however in default Safari 5 only about 60% render correctly
- bzbarsky 16y agoA lot of these are only rendered "properly" by WebKit because they're using WebKit-specific syntax. And I don't mean the prefixes; I mean cases where the WebKit-prefixed syntax differs from what the spec drafts say. So if you just swap the prefixes it'll look "wrong" in browsers that are following the draft more closely.